Testify: The Open-Science Movement Catches Fire

For years, the open science movement has sought to light a fire about the “closed” journal-publication system. In the last few weeks their efforts seemed to have ignited a broader flame, driven mainly, it seems, by the revelation that one of the most resented publishers, Elsevier, was backing the Research Works Act — some tomfoolery I noted in Congress Considers Paywalling Science You Already Paid For, on Jan 6. Now, 24 days later, scientists are pledging by the hundreds to not cooperate with Elsevier in any way — refusing to publish in its journals, referee its papers, or do the editorial work that researchers have been supplying to journals without charge for decades — and the rebellion is repeatedly reaching the pages of the New York Times and Forbes. This is easily the biggest surge the open-science movement has ever put on. At The Cost of Knowledge, the site created for the roster, there were 1,400 signatories last night, and when I woke today at 5 a.m., over 1,600. The thing seems to be snowballing. Some have ached to take action for years. Others are newly radicalized. In my feature I speculated whether librarians would eventually lead the charge. But Jason Hoyt, then of Mendeley and now of OpenRePub, seemed to have it closer: The revolution awaited only the researchers. A skim through their testimony (below the jump here) is an education in why the call for open science is going mainstream:

Professional Engineer & author of 2 published papers. I’m particularly frustrated by having Elsevier’s papers returned in Google searches. I have to guess from Google’s excerpt whether it’s worth my $$$ to buy. I live in the Rocky Mountains and don’t have a nearby university library to visit.

Scientific research needs publishers that are actually committed to the wide dissemination of information. The economic models of the 20th century are obsolete in the Information Age. Publishers should learn from modern approaches to the dissemination of scientific information, follow the lead of PLoS and BiomedCentral.

The public finances research effort. Peer-review effort comes from individual researchers performing a public service to their discipline, not from Elsevier. Research funding is most effective when research outcome are accessible, easier reuse and build upon.

We slave in the lab and go through strenuous grant applications in order for our work to be restricted behind a pay-wall? I don’t think that’s how I want my research to be remembered.

Paul Manning Trent University

won’t publish, won’t referee, won’t do editorial work

I have already removed myself from the editorial board of an Elsevier journal which I have worked extensively with on January 18th to protest their position on SOPA

Paul Muhly University of Iowa – Mathematics

won’t publish, won’t referee, won’t do editorial work

I have been boycotting Elsevier for since roughly 2000. I quit my editorship of JMAA, and have refused to publish in or referee for any Elsevier publication since. I am delighted to learn of all the support for this effort.

My personal experience with Elsevier, as a journal editor, has taught me that the company exists solely to reap exorbitant profits. Its operation IMO is excessively bureaucratic and wasteful. The vast sums subscribers pay only perpetuate such inefficiencies without delivering value in return. Schumpeterian creative destruction is in order. Perish Elsevier and release your resources to more enlightened operations!

With a super-high cost of Elsevier publications, i wonder how the poor countries like Vietnam can access the knowledge resourceses like Elsevier. I won’t publish, won’t referee, won’t do editorial work.

Florian Wolf mergeflow AG – Computer Science

won’t publish, won’t referee, won’t do editorial work

The “standard academic publishing model” works like this: academics write papers (not paid by publishers), do reviews (not paid by publishers), and act as editors (not paid by publishers). Now, publishers enter the stage and put their name on the papers — definitely not for free. Hmmmm…